Court dismisses Writ Petition, emphasizes GST Act compliance and appellate remedies.

The Court dismissed the Writ Petition, directing the petitioner to participate in proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act. The Court emphasized the strict enforcement of rules to prevent tax evasion and the need for aggrieved parties to seek redress through the appellate authority. The judgment underscored the importance of compliance with statutory provisions and the availability of appellate remedies for dissatisfied parties. The petitioner was allowed to appeal against the adjudication orders, with a stay against the invocation of the bank guarantee for two months from the judgment date.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of notice Form GST Mov-02 due to expired E-way bill during breakdown.
2. Maintainability of the petition based on Section 129 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act.

Issue 1: Validity of notice Form GST Mov-02 due to expired E-way bill during breakdown

The petitioner argued that the impugned notice Form GST Mov-02 was illegal as the goods were being transported with an expired E-way bill due to a breakdown that prevented renewal within the prescribed time. The learned counsel emphasized that the breakdown caused the E-way bill to expire over the weekend, making it impossible to renew it. However, the Government Pleader contended that the petition was not maintainable under Section 129 of the GST Act, citing a previous judgment. The Court noted that at the time of inspection, the goods lacked valid documents required by the GST Act, leading to proceedings under Section 129. Referring to a previous case, the Court highlighted that the proper officer does not have discretion to condone procedural lapses and must interpret rules strictly to prevent tax evasion. The petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority against the proper officer's findings, as per Section 129(3) of the Act.

Issue 2: Maintainability of the petition based on Section 129 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act

The Government Pleader argued that the petition was not maintainable, pointing to the provisions of Section 129 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act. Citing a previous judgment in a similar matter, the Court emphasized that the proper officer must strictly enforce rules to prevent tax evasion and that any aggrieved party must seek redress through the appellate authority. The Court reiterated that the petitioner's remedy lay in appealing against the adjudication orders before the appellate authority under the Act. Consequently, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition, allowing the petitioner to participate in proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act while upholding the stay against the invocation of the bank guarantee for two months from the judgment date.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the strict enforcement of rules under Section 129 of the GST Act, emphasizing the importance of preventing tax evasion and directing aggrieved parties to seek redress through the appellate authority. The judgment highlighted the necessity for proper compliance with statutory provisions and the availability of appellate remedies for parties dissatisfied with the decisions of the proper officer.

---